- From: Sylvain Galineau <sylvaing@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 04:47:06 +0000
- To: Charles Pritchard <chuck@jumis.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
[Charles Pritchard:] > > On 2/23/2012 1:07 PM, Sylvain Galineau wrote: > > [Charles Pritchard:] > >> On 2/23/2012 8:38 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > >>> On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 8:14 PM, Charles Pritchard<chuck@jumis.com> > >> wrote: > >>>> If at all possible, it'd be great to see Mozilla, Opera, Microsoft > >>>> and Gapple pick up -css- as a cross-vendor prefix: > >>>> > >>>> I'd like to see -css- supported in the next beta releases: > >>>> > >>>> The -css-transform family. > >>>> -css-appearance: none (and I think auto, or inherit, or whatever it > is). > >>>> > >>> What's the benefit of this? > >> There's a growing collection of names that are shared across > >> implementations but are not ready to be unprefixed. > ... > >> This is a middle ground, proposed by David Singer, between rushing > >> out recommendations and waiting years. > >> As an author, I think this would be helpful. And I would prefer -css- > >> over -draft-. > >> > > Just saying 'I'd like X to happen in the next beta releases' is not > > that helpful for any topic on this list. The why and how is what matters. > > > > This specific proposal has been discussed several times on the list - > > every time there is a vendor prefix discussion, really - and no > > consensus in its > > David's proposal was the best compromise I've seen in the entire > discussion. It's new, it popped up recently, and I didn't see anything in > the way of objections. I can't tell what's new about it. Having one prefix such as -w3c- or draft has been discussed a few times [1]. [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2010Mar/0317.html > Tab worried out-loud that it might harm vendor prefixes. I replied that, > if a vendor prefix is used subsequently in the style sheet, things would > work out fine. > > I take it from your response, that you're voting "no" on this solution. > So it goes. What I vote is not the issue. Re-debating the same things over and over is tiresome. Though, again, I do appreciate that it's hard to look for previous instances. > I'll hope in private that the -webkit- and -moz- might find some agreement > in time. They each have a lot of overlapping names. > We all have a lot of overlapping names. That's the whole point of the current scheme...
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 04:47:39 UTC